Democrats: No collusion, no problem – well just make it up

Democrats: No collusion, no problem – well just make it up﻿

Remember back in 1986 when Geraldo Rivera opened Al Capone’s vault in Chicago on TV? The program aired live on Chicago’s WGN and in syndication around the country. He found nothing, except a couple of empty gin bottles and some dust, lots of dust. Rivera had staked what little reputation he had left on finding something, anything, yet the viewing audience was left with nothing but commercials for the Cubs-Cardinals game the following day for their two-hour time investment. (The Cubs won 3-2.)

A couple of weeks ago the Mueller investigation came to an abrupt halt. Despite more than two years, millions of taxpayer dollars spent, and hundreds interviewed, no collusionbetween Trump and the Russians could be found. Much like Rivera, the Democrats and the media (but I repeat myself) invested all they had and risked reputations banking on an all-but-certain indictment of Trump and his henchmen. (Stop laughing, some in the media still think they have reputations. Honest!) Yet, what was discovered was the equivalent of a couple of empty gin bottles, neither of which, it appears, colluded with the Russians.

(Michael Cohen’s attorney has objected to his client being compared to an empty gin bottle. “We firmly believe my client is a full bottle of gin. Bathtub gin, perhaps, but a full bottle, nonetheless.”)

Distraught Democrats, convinced that Donald Trump would end up in handcuffs, cancelled MSNBC watch parties. Crisis counselors went on high alert, certain that Alyssa Milano would be speed dialing them – all of them. College students crammed into campus safe spaces, and many have yet to leave (there were mid-terms to avoid). And there were even unconfirmed reports that Alec Baldwin was so despondent that assaulting an unassuming New Yorker over a disputed parking spot no longer held any appeal.

Late night talk show hosts have run out of things to talk about now that the Mueller report found no collusion. They have had to resort to interviewing their guests.

Oh, these are indeed sad times to be a Democrat. But, wait, every time is a sad time to be a Democrat. Just ask them. They are never happy. As long as the lowliest customer service representative makes less than the company CEO (white, male and privileged, of course) and Jussie Smollett doesn’t win every NAACP award, no Democrat can sleep at night.

Lets’ remember what led to the whole Trump-Russia collusion investigation in the first place. Hillary Clinton and herhenchmen paid a former unreliable FBI informant for a dossier of dirt on Donald Trump. A dossier? Right. At my local grocery store, it is called a supermarket tabloid. The only difference between the Steele dossier and the National Enquirer is that the dossier contained no references to Kim Kardashian (although the lower-tier Kardashian, Khloe, did get two mentions – something having to do with dancing with Cossacks) and has fewer personal ads for spiritual consultants and energy psychics.

But the dossier did include this tidbit:

Green Psychic – When you really want to know when climate change will kill the earth. Only 12 rubles per reading. Two readings for 20 rubles. Hurry, this is a limited time offer, if you catch our drift.

Fortunately, Democrats are nothing if not resilient. They will not take Mueller’s finding that there is nothing there to mean that there is nothing there. Despite any lack of evidence of collusion, that should not give anyone the belief that there is no evidence. This is the line of reasoning of Adam Schiff (D-LA Zoo), House Intel Committee chair. He clearly believes that House Democrats are better at making things up than the FBI, Mueller’s investigative team, or CNN.

House Judiciary Committee chair, Jerald Nadler (D-Hell’s Kitchen) believes there is not only collusion on Trump’s part, but a cover-up to boot – and that there is evidence that does not exist that will corroborate that.

But it isn’t just Schiff or Nadler who are taking Mueller’s no as, well, no. Just about every left-wing television personality has jumped on the we-know-better-than-Mueller bandwagon. Some of the accusations of collusion include:

Despite occurring six years before he was born, Trump orchestrated the murder of Leon Trotsky in Mexico at the behest of Stalin;

As a young teen, Trump helped Fidel Castro pick the sites where Russian missiles were to be installed in Cuba.

Sang backup vocals on the Beatles’ Back in the USSR.

Knows people who drink vodka.

Knows people who make vodka.

Knows, but doesn’t like, people who don’t drink vodka.

Tries to deflect collusioncharges by bringing up Soviet spy Alger Hiss, who the Democrats know never colluded with the Russians.

Has been seen eating caviar and the occasional cabbage-based soup, a staple of Russian cuisine.

Routinely pronounces the r’s correctly when saying Perestroika.

Don’t miss an article! Get alerts delivered to your mailbox.

Please leave this field empty

Check your inbox or spam folder to confirm your subscription.

Naturally, over at MSNBC they take these allegations very seriously and believe much more investigation is needed – especially the part about the cabbage. Rachel Maddow certainly wonders if Trump gets his cabbage from Russia. Rushing back from a vacation where she was fishing for bad headlines, she hosted a special Trump-Cabbage collusion edition of her show where she announced that there is plenty of fine cabbage grown right here in the United States, in states like California, Wisconsin, New York, Florida and Texas. Well, forget Texas, they just re-elected Ted Cruz. But those other states have plenty of cabbage, yet Trump may seem to prefer Russian cabbage. Why?

Maddow and her MSNBC colleagues were able to secure the White House menu for next Thursday. It turns out warm cabbage, fennel and pear salad starts off the dinner. This, they claim, is clear evidence of collusion with the Russians. Who would ever consider pairing cabbage with pears but a Russian operative. They are sure it violates several constitutional amendments, a few United Nations treaties and maybe even the infield fly rule. Democratic lawyers, members of Congress and Al Sharpton are still discussing those possibilities.

The Democrats are left with a very uncomfortable thought – they may have to try to win the 2020 presidential election. If only they could get the voting age reduced to seven.